Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD926 Case Number: LCR13607 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: VENDING AUTOMATIC LTD - and - A WORKER |
Car Expenses.
Recommendation:
4. The Court considers the Company's failure to participate in
the hearing of this case as contrary to good industrial relations
and particularly unreasonable in the specific context of
claimant's employment situation.
Having considered the written and oral evidence presented by the
claimant and the subsequent written response from the Company's
Solicitors, the Court is of the view that the claimant's case is
well-grounded and recommends as follows:-
(1) - that the Company pay the claimant a sum of £5,000
in respect of arrears of car expenses incurred by
the claimant as a result of having to provide a car
for his job.
(2) - that the Company increase the claimant's car
allowance to £200 per month with effect from 1st
January, 1992 and that the allowance be indexed to
the C.P.I. and adjusted on an annual basis. This
allowance should cease should the claimant be
provided with a company car.
(3) - that as an alternative to the allowance at (2)
above, the Company may from the 1st January, 1992,
pay the claimant a mileage allowance based on the
A.A. total costs per mile rates.
(4) - that the Company withdraw its letter of 27th
August, 1991 to the claimant and that this claim
should not be to the detriment of his future
employment.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD926 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13607
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: VENDING AUTOMATIC LTD
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Car Expenses.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned commenced employment with the Company in
March, 1978 as a service engineer. He repairs and maintains
vending machines in Dublin City and County. On joining the
Company the worker had the use of a Company van. In May, 1978 the
worker opted to use his own car for Company business and in return
he was paid a monthly car allowance. In 1988 the worker's car was
ten years old and giving continuous mechanical trouble. He
purchased a new car. The worker claims that in the period May,
1988 to July, 1991 he was almost running the car for Company
business at his own expense (details with the Court). He
submitted a claim for costs in relation to the running of his car
for Company business. The Company rejected the claim. Local
level discussion and the refusal of the worker to use his car for
Company business for a two weeks' period failed to resolve the
issue. Following the refusal of the worker to use his car for
Company business the Company formally advised him that, in order
to comply with the conditions of his employment, he must provide
his own car for work purposes and that any further action on his
part would be viewed in a very serious light and might lead to his
dismissal. The worker referred the matter to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation under Section 20(1), of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the
recommendation of the Court. Prior to the Court hearing on 7th
February, 1992 the Company informed the Court that they would not
be represented at the hearing. Solicitors for the Company wrote
to the Court on 20th February, 1992, setting out the reasons for
the Company's non-attendance.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker has given the Company fourteen years of good
service and has behaved honourably and reasonably with the
Company in the matter of car expenses.
2. No written terms of conditions of employment exist
between the Company and the worker.
3. The Company should formally withdraw its letter of
27th August, 1991.
4. The Company should provide compensation for the losses
incurred in respect of business travel for the period May,
1988 to July, 1991.
5. The Company should pay a mileage allowance, preferably
the Civil Service rate. The payment should be provided for in
written terms and conditions of employment. The rate must
also take account of telephone charges, parking charges and
toll bridge charges.
6. The Company, as an alternative to 5 above, should
provide the worker with a Company car.
RECOMMENDATION:
4. The Court considers the Company's failure to participate in
the hearing of this case as contrary to good industrial relations
and particularly unreasonable in the specific context of
claimant's employment situation.
Having considered the written and oral evidence presented by the
claimant and the subsequent written response from the Company's
Solicitors, the Court is of the view that the claimant's case is
well-grounded and recommends as follows:-
(1) - that the Company pay the claimant a sum of £5,000
in respect of arrears of car expenses incurred by
the claimant as a result of having to provide a car
for his job.
(2) - that the Company increase the claimant's car
allowance to £200 per month with effect from 1st
January, 1992 and that the allowance be indexed to
the C.P.I. and adjusted on an annual basis. This
allowance should cease should the claimant be
provided with a company car.
(3) - that as an alternative to the allowance at (2)
above, the Company may from the 1st January, 1992,
pay the claimant a mileage allowance based on the
A.A. total costs per mile rates.
(4) - that the Company withdraw its letter of 27th
August, 1991 to the claimant and that this claim
should not be to the detriment of his future
employment.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
31st March, 1992 ----------------
F.B./U.S. Chairman
NOTE
Inquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.